Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismissed a false designation-of-origin claim under the federal Lanham Act in a “Buck Rogers” trademark dispute, but allowed the plaintiff to proceed with a trademark dilution claim under the federal statute. The Dille Family Trust v. The Nowlan Family Trust, 15-6231.
In 1942, to settle litigation between them, the widow of Buck Rogers creator Philip Francis Nowlan assigned intellectual property rights, including “Buck Rogers” trademarks, to the John F. Dille Co., for whose National Newspaper Service the late Nowlan had come up with the Rogers character. But the Dille and Nowlan trusts nevertheless have battled for years over Buck Rogers trademark rights.
The Dille Trust currently claims that a Nowlan Trust agent pitched a Buck Rogers pilot script and series character “bible” to the Sy-Fy Network. As to the Dille Trust's false designation of origin claim under '43(a) of the Lanham Act, Pennsylvania federal District Judge Wendy Beetlestone found “to the extent that Plaintiff alleges that Defendant marketed the script and series bible as discrete products to Sy-Fy and other networks, these items constitute 'tangible products sold in the marketplace,' and therefore qualify as 'goods' under the Lanham Act.” But Judge Beetlestone added “future movies or television series are neither 'tangible,' nor 'sold in the marketplace' because they do not yet exist as discrete products. Plaintiff cannot overcome the hypothetical nature of these products by basing its claim on the 'rights' to produce them because ' intangible rights are specifically excluded from the purview of the Lanham Act.”
On the other hand, Judge Beetlestone refused to dismiss the Dille Trust's '43(c) trademark dilution claim, noting: “The core of [this] claim is that Defendant used the same mark in the same marketplace as Plaintiff (i.e., licensing of the rights for movies, television series, and associated merchandise). Plaintiff has also pled numerous facts concerning its own established use of the mark in that marketplace, as well as facts suggesting that this use was widely recognized. Taken as true, these allegations are sufficient to plausibly support an inference that Defendant's use created a likelihood of dilution by blurring '.”
Stan Soocher is Editor-in-Chief of Entertainment Law & Finance and a tenured Associate Professor of Music & Entertainment Studies at the University of Colorado's Denver Campus. His most recent book is Baby You're a Rich Man: Suing the Beatles for Fun & Profit (ForeEdge/University Press of New England). For more, visit www.stansoocher.com.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.
The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.
As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.